Reviving a TNA Tradition: Why King of the Mountain Should Return in 2013
Since its creation in 2004, the King of the Mountain match has changed the way in which fans view the traditional ladder match. From the penalty box to the reverse ladder stipulation, the King of the Mountain match set TNA Wrestling apart from the competition.
Unlike your traditional ladder match where participants fight to retrieve the object hanging above the ring, participants in this match had to fight in order to hang the object above the ring themselves in order to win.
Five men entered, but only one could hang the championship belt and be announced as the winner.
All five participants would start the match at once, none of which would be eligible to hang the championship above the ring. In order to become eligible to win, a wrestler must get a pinfall or submission on an opponent.
The wrestler who submits or is pinned is then forced to spend two minutes out of action, and locked inside a penalty box. Meanwhile, the person who forced them into the penalty box is then eligible to retrieve the belt from an official and attempt to hang it above the ring in order to win.
In writing, it may be difficult to grasp but, when seen in action, the concept is easier to understand.
These King of the Mountain matches were the staple of TNA Slammiversary events. They were a brainchild of TNA such like the Ultimate X, Monster's Ball, Xscape Match, and more recent, Bound For Glory Series.
The King of the Mountain match brought a certain aroma to Slammiversary, but that aroma would be drained from the very roots of the pay-per-view in 2010.
The news of this stipulation's termination in 2010 left many fans upset and left a major void in Slammiversary. The King of the Mountain match would often main event TNA's celebratory anniversary event but, with it gone, nothing made Slammiversary unique anymore.
The King of the Mountain match was one of TNA's most popular and beloved match types, and it made Slammiversary into one of TNA's most successful and highly anticipated pay-per-view events of the calendar year.
Without the King of the Mountain match, Slammiversary would fall back into the realm of unimportant filler pay-per-views such as Victory Road or No Surrender. In fact, for the first time since 2006, TNA's anniversary event was held in the IMPACT Zone for 2010 and 2011, while Lockdown and Bound For Glory were the only shows taken on the road.
Slammiversary lives on today as one of TNA's Big 4 pay-per-view events, but what makes it unique? What makes it stand on its own when compared to Genesis, Lockdown, and Bound For Glory?
Genesis is rather bland, but it features some aftermath from Bound For Glory. Lockdown guarantees steel cage matches and always has the Lethal Lockdown. And Bound For Glory is the culmination of a year's worth of events in TNA, and has the BFG Series lead into it.
One can argue that Slammiversary has the announcement of the latest inductee into the TNA Hall of Fame. However, WWE's method of announcing their Hall of Fame class on various episodes of RAW is simpler and doesn't use pay-per-view time.
Would you like to see TNA revive the King of the Mountain match?
The King of the Mountain match is what set Slammiversary apart from every available show. King of the Mountain was Slammiversary and, without it, it never truly feels like a TNA anniversary event.
If you're like me, and all those who have already signed, and miss TNA's classic King of the Mountain match, please sign the Twitition and rally up as many people as possible to do the same. If it becomes popular enough, maybe TNA will listen and bring back the match.
The more signatures and attention this petition garners, the more powerful it'll become, and the better odds it has of making an impact (no pun intended).
As fans, let your voices be heard and let TNA know that we want the King of the Mountain match back!
For exclusive interviews with wrestlers or more wrestling related articles, news, updates, podcasts, videos or wallpapers; visit WrestleEnigma.com!
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?